Martinpf containerregistry microsoft.container registry 2025 06 01 preview

[martinpf]

Choose a PR Template

Switch to "Preview" on this description then select one of the choices below.

Click here to open a PR for a Data Plane API.

Click here to open a PR for a Control Plane (ARM) API.

Click here to open a PR for only SDK configuration.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Next Steps to Merge

Next steps that must be taken to merge this PR:

• ❌ This PR targets either the main branch of the public specs repo or the RPSaaSMaster branch of the private specs repo. These branches are not intended for iterative development. Therefore, you must acknowledge you understand that after this PR is merged, the APIs are considered shipped to Azure customers. Any further attempts at in-place modifications to the APIs will be subject to Azure's versioning and breaking change policies. Additionally, for control plane APIs, you must acknowledge that you are following all the best practices documented by ARM at aka.ms/armapibestpractices. If you do intend to release the APIs to your customers by merging this PR, add the PublishToCustomers label to your PR in acknowledgement of the above. Otherwise, retarget this PR onto a feature branch, i.e. with prefix release- (see aka.ms/azsdk/api-versions#release--branches).
• ❌ This PR is in purview of the ARM review (label: ARMReview). This PR must get ARMSignedOff label from an ARM reviewer.
  This PR has ARMChangesRequested label. Please address or respond to feedback from the ARM API reviewer.
  When you are ready to continue the ARM API review, please remove the ARMChangesRequested label.
  Automation should then add WaitForARMFeedback label.
  ❗If you don't have permissions to remove the label, request write access per aka.ms/azsdk/access#request-access-to-rest-api-or-sdk-repositories.
  For details of the ARM review, see aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review
  
• ❌ The required check named Automated merging requirements met has failed. This is the final check that must pass. Refer to the check in the PR's 'Checks' tab for details on how to fix it and consult the aka.ms/ci-fix guide. In addition, refer to step 4 in the PR workflow diagram

[openapi-pipeline-app]

PR validation pipeline restarted successfully. If there is ApiView generated, it will be updated in this comment.

[github-actions]

API Change Check

APIView identified API level changes in this PR and created the following API reviews

Language	API Review for Package
Swagger	Microsoft.ContainerRegistry
Go	sdk/resourcemanager/containerregistry/armcontainerregistry
Java	com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-containerregistry-generated
JavaScript	@azure/arm-containerregistry
Python	azure-mgmt-containerregistry

[mentat9]

@martinpf - Please fix LintDiff errors before ARM review. Also, you need to add the submission template at the top and fill it out.

[martinpf]

@mentat9 replying to:

@martinpf - Please fix LintDiff errors before ARM review. Also, you need to add the submission template at the top and fill it out.

I addressed all the LintDiff errors that could be addressed.

• There are 2 that relate to the API change that are unclear. What does the RequestSchemaForTrackedResourcesMustHaveTags errors mean exactly? The info link returns 404. Those put actions appear to have tags, so which tags where?
• The remaining issues are not related to the actions being modified. These should be in the pre existing errors/warings section of the report. We cannot change some of them in any case (our controllers return 200, 202 and 204 for long running operations for example).

It's not clear which submission template you're referring to. Could you point me at it?
Our PM doc describing the breaking change is here:

https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/r/teams/ContainersSecureSupplyChain/_layouts/15/Doc.aspx?sourcedoc=%7BDBB37272-3D33-4308-B2C1-4C82EA404CBB%7D&file=[ACR-Transfer-Feature-ARM-Breaking-Change-to-Support-MI-Auth-Option.docx](https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/r/teams/ContainersSecureSupplyChain/_layouts/15/Doc.aspx?sourcedoc=%7BDBB37272-3D33-4308-B2C1-4C82EA404CBB%7D&file=ACR-Transfer-Feature-ARM-Breaking-Change-to-Support-MI-Auth-Option.docx&action=default&mobileredirect=true)&action=default&mobileredirect=true

[ramoka178]

@mentat9 replying to:

@martinpf - Please fix LintDiff errors before ARM review. Also, you need to add the submission template at the top and fill it out.

I addressed all the LintDiff errors that could be addressed.

• There are 2 that relate to the API change that are unclear. What does the RequestSchemaForTrackedResourcesMustHaveTags errors mean exactly? The info link returns 404. Those put actions appear to have tags, so which tags where?
• The remaining issues are not related to the actions being modified. These should be in the pre existing errors/warings section of the report. We cannot change some of them in any case (our controllers return 200, 202 and 204 for long running operations for example).

It's not clear which submission template you're referring to. Could you point me at it? Our PM doc describing the breaking change is here:

[https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/r/teams/ContainersSecureSupplyChain/_layouts/15/Doc.aspx?sourcedoc=%7BDBB37272-3D33-4308-B2C1-4C82EA404CBB%7D&file=ACR-Transfer-Feature-ARM-Breaking-Change-to-Support-MI-Auth-Option.docx&action=default&mobileredirect=true](https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/r/teams/ContainersSecureSupplyChain/_layouts/15/Doc.aspx?sourcedoc=%7BDBB37272-3D33-4308-B2C1-4C82EA404CBB%7D&file=%5BACR-Transfer-Feature-ARM-Breaking-Change-to-Support-MI-Auth-Option.docx%5D(https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/r/teams/ContainersSecureSupplyChain/_layouts/15/Doc.aspx?sourcedoc=%7BDBB37272-3D33-4308-B2C1-4C82EA404CBB%7D&file=ACR-Transfer-Feature-ARM-Breaking-Change-to-Support-MI-Auth-Option.docx&action=default&mobileredirect=true)&action=default&mobileredirect=true)

There are still 2 required checks failing
Swagger Avocado and
Swagger ModelValidation.
Please fix them.

The submission template is the first comment in this PR description that says "Choose a PR Template", at the very top of this PR.
Filling that will help reviewer know what is expected in this PR.

[qiaozha]

@mikeharder I wonder why services can keep adding different versions in new tags? This is violating the version uniform guideline. /cc @JeffreyRichter

[mikeharder]

What check do you think should be enforcing this? The closest I'm aware of would be Avocado:

https://github.com/Azure/avocado?tab=readme-ov-file#multiple_api_version

Check the Avocado source code to see if this is a bug or a missing feature. Then open an issue with a bug report or feature request.

[qiaozha]

This rule is a warning, and it does show this warning in the avocado CI output, I am going to change this as an error level. Azure/avocado#157